Global warming discussion IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
ehcks said:
The problem is that Haig ignores CO2 as a concept.
Click to expand...

Nope, My view is CO2 is a vital plant food and a green house gas. It does have an effect on GW but that effect is insignificant compared to natural events such as another green house gas H2O and our variable star to name two.

To him, the sun is the only cause of temperature change, in the same way that it's his only cause for earthquakes.
Click to expand...

Nope, My view is the variable Sun is the main driver of climate change not the only one. I've never said the Sun is the only cause of earthquakes or volcanoes and major weather events. The variable Sun appears to trigger those events.

Solar output is decreasing, thus the world is actually decreasing in temperature. All data to the contrary is somehow false.
Click to expand...

Yes, to the first part and open to data, to the contrary, in the second part.

There is no debating with that.
Click to expand...

Sure there is ;) Do you doubt the Sun is heading into a much less active time? Read these ...

Sun Flatlining Into Grand Minimum, Says Solar Physicis

and this...

New Insights On How Solar Minimums Affect Earth

and of course this ...

UAH Global Temperature Report: July 2015 – the pause continues
Compared to seasonal norms, the warmest average temperature anomaly on Earth in July was in southeastern Kazakhstan near the city of Almaty. The July temperature there averaged 3.33 C (about 6.0 degrees F) warmer than seasonal norms. Compared to seasonal norms, the coolest average temperature on Earth in July was in the northern Atlantic Ocean off the southeastern coast of Greenland, where the average July 2015 temperature was 3.77 C (about 6.77 degrees F) cooler than normal.
Click to expand...


Feel free to ignore this :cool:
 
July was in the northern Atlantic Ocean off the southeastern coast of Greenland, where the average July 2015 temperature was 3.77 C (about 6.77 degrees F) cooler than normal.
Click to expand...

gets wearisom Haig...you were told this before

RealClimate: What's going on in the North Atlantic?
www.realclimate.org/index.php/.../whats-going-on-in-the-north-atlantic/
Mar 23, 2015 - The cooling in the subpolar North Atlantic is remarkable and well documented ... the cold spot in central Africa, which on closer inspection apparently is an artifact ... That this might happen as a result of global warming is discussed in the .... of changes in the thermohaline circulation”, Climatic Change, vol.
Click to expand...

Welcome to this week’s installment of “Don’t Mess with Geophysics.”

Last week, we learned about the possible destabilization of the Totten Glacier of East Antarctica, which could unleash over 11 feet of sea level rise in coming centuries.

And now this week brings news of another potential mega-scale perturbation. According to a new study just out in Nature Climate Change by Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and a group of co-authors, we’re now seeing a slowdown of the great ocean circulation that, among other planetary roles, helps to partly drive the Gulf Stream off the U.S. east coast. The consequences could be dire – including significant extra sea level rise for coastal cities like New York and Boston.
Click to expand...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...he-oceans-with-potentially-dire-consequences/
 
Last edited:
Haig said:
Just ...
Click to expand...
Just do not
 
Haig said:
An analysis of BEST data for the question: Is Earth Warming or Cooling?
Click to expand...
Is this more lies from WUWT?
Looks like it
  • A unknown guest blogger called Clyde Spencer
  • The idiocy that announcements of warming temperatures can only tell us that it is currently warm!
  • Ignorance of basic climate science , e.g. the good reasons for the use of anomalies.
    Why use temperature anomalies (departure from average) and not absolute temperature measurements?
  • The idiocy of thinking that temperature readings should not be adjusted when how they are taken changes (Karl et al. (2015) and ocean buoy temperatures).
  • Coupled with the idiocy that adjusting temperatures magically makes the trends warmer.
  • The stupidity of taking exception to "conflating" sea and land surface temperatures.
    Global surface temperatures include the temperatures of the surface of the sea and land :eek:!
  • Then a long rant about using low and high temperatures instead of average temperatures.
 
Haig said:
...Happy now :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You link to an blog entry from 2009 by a Clive Best. Clive Best lies
  • There is evidence (not an assumption) that increases in man made greenhouse gases particularly CO2 causes the current global warming.
  • "CO2 measurements at Maona Loa and elsewhere clearly show that CO2 concetrations are increasing" and that is that.
    What shows that these are due to the burning of fossil fuels is the isotope ratios of the CO2 and modeling of CO2 sinks and sources.
  • Every temperature dataset says that over the last 30, 60, 90, 120, 150 years global temperatures have risen.
  • Mann's "hockey stick" graph that has been confirmed several times originally was for the past 6 centuries and used multiple proxies not just tree rings. There was just more tree ring data than other proxy data.
  • etc.
And what the half-lie you quote: "However if there are natural variations at play which are causing warming such as a continuing recovery from the little ice age, these effects are of course not included in the models."
The little ice age was a local, not global, cooling period. The Earth is not recovering from it - Europe is!
If the models did not include natural variations than the models would not it existing data :eek:

We are happy that you are confirming a dedication to climate change denial lies, Haig :rolleyes:
 
Oh my

I’d like to start off by examining the logical fallacy of the common idea that these pronouncements support the idea of continued warming. They only provide evidence for it currently being warm!
Click to expand...

:dl:


Meanwhile the beast lurks in the Pacific..

Screen%252520Shot%2525202015-08-13%252520at%252520Aug%25252C%25252013%252520%252520%252520%2525202015%252520%252520%252520%2525207.38.48%252520PM.jpg


http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/13/weather/el-nino-2015/index.html
 
Last edited:
Haig: Explaining how the water vapor greenhouse effect works

Haig said:
Nope, My view is CO2 is a vital plant food and a green house gas. It does have an effect on GW but that effect is insignificant compared to natural events such as another green house gas H2O and our variable star to name two.
Click to expand...
Your view has nothing to do with the real world, Haig, as you have known for years.
12 August 2015 Haig: 5 years of denial of science dating from 19th February 2010 (a new Maunder Minimum will only have a small effect on global warming).
12 August 2015 Haig: Your denial of the real world where the Sun's output has been constant for the last 35 years while global temperatures have increased continues.
but the H2O thing looks new so:
14 August 2045 Haig: Explaining how the water vapor greenhouse effect works
Water vapour is the most dominant greenhouse gas. Water vapour is also the dominant positive feedback in our climate system and amplifies any warming caused by changes in atmospheric CO2. This positive feedback is why climate is so sensitive to CO2 warming.
Click to expand...
 
macdoc said:
Oh my



:dl:


Meanwhile the beast lurks in the Pacific..

[qimg]https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-HqB6BX7TLWU/Vc0q47QA5iI/AAAAAAAAOQI/yNyTwKYrLFA/s720-Ic42/Screen%252520Shot%2525202015-08-13%252520at%252520Aug%25252C%25252013%252520%252520%252520%2525202015%252520%252520%252520%2525207.38.48%252520PM.jpg[/qimg]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/13/weather/el-nino-2015/index.html
Click to expand...


Oh my



:dl:


Another excuse for the pause, Trenberth says ‘Internal climate variability masks climate-warming trends’
Amid climate change debates revolving around limited increases in recent global mean surface temperature (GMST) rates, Kevin Trenberth argues that natural climate fluxes – larger than commonly appreciated – can overwhelm background warming, making plateaued rates, or hiatuses, deceiving in significance. After many years of monitoring, it’s clear that the GMST can vary from year to year, even decade to decade; these differences, Trenberth argues, are largely a result of internal natural variability.
Click to expand...
 
Trakar said:
Watt's political machinations aren't just funny to dogs, they verge on the criminal and most often seem pathological in nature.
Click to expand...


Don't shot the messengers Trakar :D

Watt's and the AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE are quoting Trenberth:eek:

From the AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE and the “if warming can’t overcome Nature, is it really there at all?” department.
Click to expand...

Has there been a hiatus? Kevin E. Trenberth :dl:


Edit:- Here is the full paper ...

Has there been a hiatus?
Because of global warming, numerous studies have found large regional trends over the past 40 years or so, the period for which we have the best data. However, the associated changes in the atmospheric circulation are mostly not from anthropogenic climate change but rather reflect large natural variability on decadal time scales. The latter has limited predictability and may be underrepresented in many models, but needs to be recognized in adaptation planning. Natural fluctuations are big enough to overwhelm the steady background warming at any point in time.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
 
Last edited:
Haig said:
Another excuse for the pause, Trenberth says ‘Internal climate variability masks climate-warming trends’
Click to expand...
This is Anthony Watts recording his incompetence by relying on press releases and not even knowing about Google ("I’ve looked all over trying to find the citation in the press release and have come up empty") !
The idiocy is that he complains about the press release and does not link to it!

Anthony Watts lies about the press release. It is not 'Internal climate variability masks climate-warming trends" but "These natural variations are strong enough to mask steady background warming at any point in time, Trenberth argues.".
Climate is trends over 3 decades or more.
Trenberth is talking about a given year or decade or even locally as seen in the Science paper.
Has there been a hiatus? by Kevin E. Trenberth
Every decade since the 1960s has been warmer than the one before, with 2000 to 2009 by far the warmest decade on record (see the figure). However, the role of human-induced climate change has been discounted by some, owing to a markedly reduced increase in global mean surface temperature (GMST) from 1998 through 2013, known as the hiatus (1–3). The upward trend has resumed in 2014, now the warmest year on record, with 2015 temperatures on course for another record-hot year. Although Earth's climate is undoubtedly warming, weather-related and internal natural climate variability can temporarily overwhelm global warming in any given year or even decade, especially locally.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I would suggest that this topic is no laughing matter....

Poor harvests and low stocks of grains in 2008 combined with a host of other factors to produce a spectacular price rise in cereals, with a UN index of prices peaking at 2.8 times higher than it was at the turn of the millennium.
"If we are coping with demand increase by sustainable intensification, but then we suddenly have a catastrophic year, and we lose a big chunk of the world's calories, everybody will feel it."
Prof Tim Benton, UK Global Food Security Programme
In 2010-11, a heat wave in Russia led to the country's worst drought in 40 years, decimating the grain harvest and leading indirectly, to food riots in North African countries as prices of bread rose rapidly.
Now researchers from the US and the UK have analysed the chances of extreme weather events causing these types of food shocks as the world warms over the coming century.
Click to expand...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-33910552
 
It is when comes to deniers...their efforts of late are pathetic verging into comedic

....it's not when it comes to real world consequences. California's predicament with the Ridiculous Resilient Ridge was anticipated a decade ago and the heat wave currently
in India is devastating.

Increased intensity of rain events is also hitting home as cities in areas unprepared for tropical level rains are being overwhelmed.

There is lots of work on "heat proofing crops" but there is little to be done in flood proofing.
 
Last edited:
uk_dave said:
I would suggest that this topic is no laughing matter....
Click to expand...

Imagine what is going to happen to climate change deniers when large natural systems fail such as large ocean fisheries collapse, or there are major crop failures, and people finally realize that the future is going to be horrific.
So many people are going to be so pissed off and they are going to ask why nothing happened. The blame will rightfully land on the climate change deniers.
Imagine teenagers learning that they have no future due to climate change deniers efforts.

In hot water: Columbia's sockeye salmon face mass die-off
http://america.aljazeera.com/articl...-rivers-sockeye-salmon-dying-due-to-heat.html

We are all familiar with the California drought, the other droughts around the world and the thousands of deaths due to the record heat waves in places like Pakistan and India this year.

Oysters have to be initially raised in tanks in the Pacific Northwest due to the ocean being so acidic.

Red crabs, sea lions and many other species are dying in the Pacific Ocean this year and the record ocean heat stretches from California to Alaska. 30,000 walruses have beached themselves in the Arctic due to the loss of the sea ice.

It's coming faster than people expect and the masses are going to be in a state of total rage looking for answers and the people responsible.

Given all the evidence that is available today climate change deniers will have no excuse that is good enough in the future. Imagine giving people that are prone to ending up in prison justification for coming after you. Even the people that know little or nothing about climate change will be looking to place the blame on others.

Climate change deniers have it coming to them eventually. It's not something I condone but it is highly likely IMHO.

This laughing matter will be over in the not too distant future.

.
 
Last edited:
macdoc said:
It is when comes to deniers...their efforts of late are pathetic verging into comedic

....it's not when it comes to real world consequences. California's predicament with the Ridiculous Resilient Ridge was anticipated a decade ago and the heat wave currently
in India is devastating.

Increased intensity of rain events is also hitting home as cities in areas unprepared for tropical level rains are being overwhelmed.

There is lots of work on "heat proofing crops" but there is little to be done in flood proofing.
Click to expand...


Actually later this decade SC24 solar activity will plummet down and merge into the next prolonged “Grand Minimum” – by that stage the game will be over for the “Warmists” because no one will be listening anymore to their “warmist rants” as the charge of the “Meridonal Jet Streams” torpedo the “Theory of AGW” once and for all via “prolonged bitter winters” that everyone will be dreading, especially those living in the high latitude northern hemisphere

The penny is beginning to drop that the variable Sun ( the active Sun verses the inactive Sun ) has been misjudged with respect to climate change ...

Is the Sun driving ozone and changing the climate?
The central mystery in climate science is the Sun. The direct energy from the 1.4 million-kilometer-wide flaming ball stays remarkably constant. The radiation pours down on us but the relentless sameness of the watts can’t be causing of the swings in temperature on Earth. Something else is going on with the Sun. For one thing, the total light energy coming off the Sun stays almost the same but the type of light changes — the spectrum shifts – with more shorter wavelengths at one point in the cycle and longer wavelengths at the opposite part of the cycle. These have different effects. Shorter wavelengths (UV) generate ozone in the stratosphere and penetrate the ocean. Longer wavelengths don’t. But the Sun is also sending out charged particles and driving a massive fluctuating magnetic field, both of which affect Earth’s atmosphere.

But the tiny changes in total sunlight (TSI) may still be leaving us clues about other things going on with the Sun. David Evans’ notch-delay theory is that TSI is a leading indicator, and after solar TSI peaks, the temperatures on Earth follows with a peak roughly 11 years or so later (or one solar cycle). But what’s the mechanism? Stephen Wilde has a theory. Plug in your brain, and follow this chain of potential influence:

The Sun —-> UV or charged particles —- > ozone —-> polar jet streams —–> clouds —–> surface temperatures.
Click to expand...


And the above is supported by this ...

Is Ozone Recovery Warming the Stratosphere – And Adding Credence to Solar Variability?
What’s rather striking, though, is that the flat-lining of stratospheric temperatures since roughly 1998 corresponds quite remarkably with the current “pause” in surface temperatures. This prompts a question: Could the stabilization of ozone levels in the stratosphere help to explain the subsequent ‘pause?’
If so, would the IPCC wish to promote this fact? Such a correlation would finally solve a vexing, recent climate mystery. But it would also establish a more concrete solar connection to temperature variability.
Click to expand...
 
Haig said:
Sun Flatlining Into Grand Minimum, Says Solar Physicis
Click to expand...

"Could a Maunder Minimum mitigate a warming climate?

Not likely, says Hathaway.

Although the rise of global temperatures seen in “the last decade or so seems to have currently leveled off,” says Hathaway, he notes that even a Maunder Minimum would still not be enough to counter the warming effects of anthropogenic climate change.

If anything, a Maunder Minimum may simply make existing weather and short term climate even more unusual and difficult to predict."
 
Haig - active sun does not mean more solar irradiance....get over it.
Active sun means more electromagnetic activity, lack of it means less.

There is a warning about repetitious posts covering the ground over and over.
You can't get the difference between solar output and solar activity....that's your problem not ours.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom